Senator Norm Coleman has been trying to scuttle the immigration bill limping its way through Congress recently by attaching an amendment that will break up the fragile coalition holding the bill together;
“Republican Norm Coleman of Minnesota will attempt a second time to offer an amendment allowing officials of federal, state or local government entities to question individuals about their immigration status if the officials have probable cause to believe the individuals lack legal status.”
But as our military faces personnel shortages because Americans aren’t signing up to serve their country; the Pentagon has begun to press the Senate and the obstructionists in it to pass the Comprehensive Immigration bill.
“In other words, if you had come across (the border) with your parents, yet you were a minor child and have been in the U.S. school system for a number of years, then you could be eligible to enlist…”
Because the provision would have applied only to the “cream of the crop” of students who have demonstrated top aptitude, it would have been “very appealing” to the military, Carr said. “It would have been good for readiness,” he said.”
Norm Coleman needs to stop standing in the way of our Army and give them the tools they need to complete their mission.
Do you think that the FBI doesn’t know MS13 is in Minneapolis or wherever else?
I mean, I know this administration has shown outrageous levels of incompetence, they couldn’t protect Americans against standing water, but don’t you think that the FBI has to know that MS13 is in American cities?
And further, anyone arrested for involvement in a gang would be jailed and their citizenship would be become apparent to the police or federal officials who arrested them, who could then follow whatever appropriate methods of dealing with their citizenship or lack thereof.
But thanks for commenting.
Sean
Um….Sean, isn’t his name the Colemeleon?
Sean,
All of the 9/11 hijackers were here on expired visas. In other words, they were not in the country illegally. Many of the hijackers had been pulled over by the police for speeding tickets, traffic violations and other matters. Had they asked about immigration status, perhaps we could have prevented an attack.
The immigration bill should be scuttled in its current form. For example, illegal immigrants who have committed two crimes or less would be given a legal status and not deported. An illegal would have to commit three crimes to be deported. The bill also legalizes gang members who “pledge” to withdraw from the gang. Does anybody think the gang members won’t promise to quit the gang only to come back the very next day? Finally, the bill only gives the federal government 24 hours to do a background check before granting the illegal immigrants a legal status (ie. a “Z” Visa).
These three reasons alone are worth scuttling the so-called fragile compromise in the Senate. If the bill is crap, don’t shove it down our throats. Fix it.
The only thing I can say & be sure about, is that this thing is going to be a boondoggle -
just as REAGAN’s amnesty was.
He screwed it up decades ago.
No one really wants to remove those people, not business, not people of enough means to afford a cut rate nanny. Probably nobody shopping at discounters like WalMart.
Even labor knows that nothing substantial will happen - and that these people will be the Union members of the future - to get the benefits they undercut as undocumented/illegals.
There is no way to really do so: deport them en masse, if the will were even there, short of rounding people up like cattle in trucks, or on trains. A picture reminiscent of Jews in Germany.
Ho do you treat property of those people you deport - confiscate it as for the state? Pile it?
Mockingbird,
I agree that giving amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants will be a boondoggle. I disagree with you that the choice is between amnesty and mass deportation.
If our country had the resolve to get tough on immigration, we would simply have to enforce immigration laws - including cracking down on employers who hire illegal immigrants. The jobs would soon start drying up and the illegal immigrants would naturally begin to return to their home countries.
It’s pretty clear we don’t have the resolve for that. So in the meantime, it’s important to enforce the border to prevent another twenty million people from coming here illegally and then find a solution down the road for those who are here now and those who have been here for a long period of time.
Many of these people are the ones who make up a huge pieces of our food production infrastructure. If they were simply removed from these jobs the biggest change would be that food prices would go up substantially which will hurt those with the fewest recourses the most not just those wanting a cut-rate nanny. Right now it is illegal for employers to question a persons documents because of racial profiling concerns. If we won’t allow local law enforcement to question a persons status why should we expect private business to do so when we have laws that say they shouldn’t. In this case employers are the easy scapegoat used by those who would rather blame a faceless entity than those crossing illegally.
Coming to this country without proper documentation is illegal. So is driving too fast, shoplifting and assault. For those crimes we ask the perpetrators to pay a fine and or spend time in jail. Allowing illegal immigrants to stay after paying a fine that is reasonable given the crime is not amnesty.
Let people pay for their crime and continue to earn their citizenship by holding jobs and showing that they can be productive members of our community.
Right now it is illegal for employers to question a persons documents because of racial profiling concerns.
Umm,, no. Employers are required by law to verify SSN’s and identification. And law enforcement wants nothing to do with immigration issues. If we require local law enforcement to check for legal status, then the immediate effect will be to drive these people further underground. And I believe it is illegal to hire someone without legal status, so just like shoplifting and driving too fast, letting CEO’s off the hook is appropriate? Deport CEO’s, it would be a lot easier rounding them up and the country will be much better off.
Richard,
You are incorrect. Clearly you’re not an employer or you would know better than to say what you did about illegal immigration. What happens is that an employer sends paperwork (Form W-4) to the IRS. The IRS verifies the SSN and sends a letter back to the employer. However, if the SSN does not match the individual’s identity or the SSN is invalid altogether, the IRS informs the employer that they need to tell the employee but that they cannot discriminate against the employee on the basis of race or nationality. Therefore, the IRS is actually complicit in knowing who is employed illegally but they will not do anything about it.
As for the argument about police pushing illegals underground, I could not disagree more. You’re the kind of person who strikes me as being sensitive to the plight of the underclass. Illegal immigrants are being disserved by cities who do not care about their status. Look at New York City which allowed 20 illegal immigrants to live in an apt. When the apt. caught fire, all but a few illegal immigrants were killed. In addition, Minneapolis refused to participate in a federal bust of a prostitution ring because the women (who were sex slaves) were illegal immigrants. I’d like to know why Minneapolis would allow women to be treated so inhumanely.
Cities need to enforce the law and protect everyone - including the illegal immigrants. Not just look the other way while people get hurt.
I am an employer and I can decline to employ someone on the basis you sited. In fact, I’m required to, unless of course I wanted to pay less then minimum, not pay payroll or SS taxes. Maybe I don’t want to provide health care for this subclass of worker. Of course if I got caught, all my workers might be deported, but oh well, there’s plenty where those came from. Oh yeah, I may have to pay a fine but that’ll just be factored in with all the other costs of doing business.
Richard,
I’m not sure when you last hired someone. But one of my clients just got a letter from the IRS stating what I briefly summarized.
Richard,
If a person has a valid looking set of documents with a real SS#, easy to get with a couple hundred dollars, the employer can not investigate the person because they suspect he/she is illegal. The vast majority of people who come here illegally invest in quality fake documents so they can get jobs. That being the primary reason they are here. This means they also are paying taxes like any other employee. Most employers who have illegals working for them have played by the rules set out by the government and should not be expected to act as law enforcement because politicians have their heads up their collective asses.
We cannot turn our business owners into border patrol agents and we do not have the recourses to find and deport the millions that are here. Make them pay a fine for their crime, like we do with any other crime, and give them a path to citizenship. If we do this we can concentrate on finding the few people crossing into our country with substantial criminal records or that wish to do us harm. Right now they are lost in the crowd of decent people who want jobs and the better way of life they can find here.
So when I check referances, I’m doing the border patrols job? It isn’t difficult for an employer to determine whether a job candidate has legal status or not. Those that don’t are being dishonest and are taking advantage of that illegals status. The CEO of Swift knew his corporate policy was to hire people with less then legal status thereby making it easier for the corp to fake injury reports and wrongful dismissal and even sexual misconduct. By keeping illegals illegal, we are constraining them to a second class citizen status. The best thing that could happen for the illegal immigrants is for them to organize and to strike until their demands are met.
So if somebody has fake documents are you then responsible? What references are you talking about? The documents can be faked with real SS#s and personal or professional references are even easier. Plus once somebody has held a job under a false identity for a few years with a job it becomes even harder to determine. They could own a house, car and be having kids. Yes, it is difficult to determine who is illegal. Do you want businesses to start needing private investigation forces so the can find out if potential employees are telling the truth or not? You want a scapegoat and the standard Liberal one is businesses and put the blame on them by painting everybody with the brush from one bad actor.
That’s right, white middle-aged businessmen cannot be held responsible for their actions. Sorry, I forgot. It’s really not difficult to check someone’s referances and employment history and it’s good business to put a good amount of effort into it. You end up with more dependable and more serious employees. If you don’t, then either your a bad businessman or you’re trying to cheat the system. Cheaters never prosper, at least long term, and if it could be proven you didn’t put a minimal amount of effort into background checks on your employees, then you should be held criminally liable should one of those employees turns out to be here illegally. Jail time or deportation for the CEO at the very least.
Richard,
You fail to respond to the points I make and instead show that you are truly a bigot by equating criminals with a race, age and social class.
KH - so it’s your contention that employers shouldn’t have to be responsible for making at minimum a good faith effort to be sure their employees are legal? If it’s not their responsibility, whose is it? Should the cops now be asked to stop in HR offices to check on what’s happening there? Immigration? Those groups are already underfunded/understaffed to do the jobs they’re supposed to be doing. Sorry, I can’t agree with you that we should just let employers off the hook. It sounds like you suggest treating this on a case by case basis. If someone is caught (by whom?) here illegally, they should pay the fine/do the time and then go on their merry way. I would like to see some sort of ‘path to legal immigration’ for these people too but I don’t see how your method would do anything to discourage the flow of illegals into the country.
The police are not interested in doing immigrations job. They work hard to build a rapport with the communities they work in and they do that so members of that community (legal citizens or not) aren’t afraid to talk to them and can help them solve/prevent more serious crime in the areas where they live. If the cops are required to start looking at papers to weed out the illegals, those lines of communication will be shut down and it makes it that much more difficult for the police to do their job.
By the way, potential employees do have to provide two forms of ID or a passport to prove eligibility to work - it’s on an I-9 form. Both my kids did when they applied for summer jobs - so it’s not illegal on racial grounds to require identification as you suggested.
Max,
To clarify. I never said or meant to imply that employers should not have to check identification. The issue is what happens when the applicant has false documentation, which is quite common and easy to obtain. To hold employers accountable for somebody else’s crime, falsifying documents, is not reasonable. In addition to this, if the applicant has documents that check out (as Chris pointed out in post from Jun 24 at 4:05) there is little the can legally do even if they suspect the person is using false documents.
I also never made any comment about whether or not local law enforcement should check a persons immigration status. I did question the idea that some believe that we should hold businesses to a higher standard than law enforcement. While I agree with your assessment of the problems produced with regular cops dealing with immigration neither can we have local governments decide what laws they choose to enforce. We have to completely rethink our current system.
All of our problems with immigration stem from our current byzantine method of letting people immigrate legally. We have to give people who want to come here to work an easy and regulated path at the same time we allow those already here to make amends and continue a path to citizenship. When that is done the few who come illegally can be assumed to be here for less than positive reasons. Then local police should have no problems check a persons status and businesses will not have to become experts in document forgery.
If somebody has a better plan I would love to hear it.